If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up
process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

ORIGINAL: combatpigg

It has honestly been 12 to 15 years since I saw an ultralight venture beyond the perimeter of our municipal airport. 20+ years ago, I used to see them out and about, but there was uausally a tragic event once or twice a year on the local news back then.
Regardless, they have NOTHING to do with my feelings about FPV. That's like saying, if I am against private citizens owning Tommy Guns or RPGs, how could I possibly advocate hunting rifles..?

We had the pleasure of having a ultralight pilot land and take back off at one of our flying spots recently and he had to transverse the city to get to our flying site...no problems whatsoever... Matter of fact, one the places I love to fly the most has ultralights take of and land fairly regularly along with other full scale...No problems there either... These big problems people manufacture about models and full scale is blown way out of proportion.

It is very important to understand that Jesus not only died for our sins but died because of our sins...even harder to understand now, exactly what were those sins???

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

Yes, ultralights have been known to traverse populated areas without incident.
It has been done.
In our area so thickly wooded and now over built with MacMansions on 1/4 acre lots everywhere [full of folks eating their MacHappy Meals], it's no wonder why we don't see as many ultralights straying very far from base these days.

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

ORIGINAL: phlpsfrnk

So you agree that not all FPV flying should be considered a modeling activity?

Regards
Frank

Yes, I agree... the same as I agree all Rider trucks aren't used for moving...been trying to hammer that home around here forever...it's not the equipment, its the intent and use of whatever that matters... He could have used a slow-stik, scale P-51 or any number of other siz wizzys and my position would be exactly the same.

It is very important to understand that Jesus not only died for our sins but died because of our sins...even harder to understand now, exactly what were those sins???

opposite end of the scale ? I've had emu also , and didn't like it one bit

Yes , if I were to shoot it , you bet I'd have to eat it , would be a Sin otherwise I agree 100%

So , Back on track , I still havn't seen any helpfull Hams post me up a list of the commonly used frequencies for FPV , with a notation of which belong to the Hams vs general public . I ain't kidding , I just may want to try AMA legal FPV , and I'd like to remain FCC legal as well . A lot of conjecture has been posted about "your pissing on Ham territory by flying FPV without a Ham license" without a clear and easy to understand chart being produced to define who owns what .

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

The complaints by a few RC'ers will have no effrct on the permisability of FPV flight however the outcry from a "citizen" over a busybody neighbor spying, or a commercial FPV flying over private property will. How many flying fields, public parks and open spaces hve been lost to noise complaints or just a person that just does not like people having fun?

The localofficials will be easily swayed by complaints of privacy and noise and it will be just too easy to ban RC flying because of the squeaky wheel.

The issue that will limit FPV is not AMA regs, control BLOS, etc, it will be the demand for privacy within ones property.

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

FPV is "In My Openion" is playing with fire as far as the FAA is concerned. The FAA doesn't listen to the NTSB ... What makes you think they are going to listen to congress of any other orginization ... The FAA has, and has had, for ever a mandate to "PROMOTE Air commerce" and protect the flying public. and the personal in the FAA changes all the time and people have differant ideas ... FPV should be put on the back burner if we expect to have any chance for it to be a viable addition to our Hobby / Sport after the FAA isues the final FAR's on sUAS, Federal Aviation Regulations on small Unmand Areial Systems. ... IMHO

Remember ... Every one of these Things we fly Comes with a Number, When the R/C Gods call that Number, it's going in a Garbage Bag, No Sniveling Allowed.
P-47 Thunderbolt Brotherhood #24 & #43

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf

ORIGINAL: phlpsfrnk

So you agree that not all FPV flying should be considered a modeling activity?

Regards
Frank

Yes, I agree... the same as I agree all Rider trucks aren't used for moving...been trying to hammer that home around here forever...it's not the equipment, its the intent and use of whatever that matters... He could have used a slow-stik, scale P-51 or any number of other siz wizzys and my position would be exactly the same.

OK, let's see if I can get a sense of the limits you will agree to here. If I were to equip my 10 lb scale Lockheed U2 with FPV, how high above 400 ft or how far out of sight should I be allowed to routinely fly it as long as I'm not using it to spy on anyone?

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

Except for flying over some other people and cars at the beginning that's what FPV is really about. The air craft were keept well with in range, had an observer and didn't try to do some thing stupid like fly near or in the clouds.
Great Job with the video. Thanks

Remember ... Every one of these Things we fly Comes with a Number, When the R/C Gods call that Number, it's going in a Garbage Bag, No Sniveling Allowed.
P-47 Thunderbolt Brotherhood #24 & #43

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

gjhinshaw,
As a modeling activity I think that is a fine example of what is not modeling. Most of the arguments are more a matter of where do we draw the line between a hobbyist UAV and a modeler's FPV equipped aircraft. To me the one major distinction between them is line-of-sight.

Regards
Frank

It is not possible to write in such a way that cannot be misinterpreted by a reader determined to do so.

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

ORIGINAL: phlpsfrnk

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf

ORIGINAL: phlpsfrnk

So you agree that not all FPV flying should be considered a modeling activity?

Regards
Frank

Yes, I agree... the same as I agree all Rider trucks aren't used for moving...been trying to hammer that home around here forever...it's not the equipment, its the intent and use of whatever that matters... He could have used a slow-stik, scale P-51 or any number of other siz wizzys and my position would be exactly the same.

OK, let's see if I can get a sense of the limits you will agree to here. If I were to equip my 10 lb scale Lockheed U2 with FPV, how high above 400 ft or how far out of sight should I be allowed to routinely fly it as long as I'm not using it to spy on anyone?

RE: AMA issues new guidelines for FPV

ORIGINAL: bradpaul

ORIGINAL: phlpsfrnk

ORIGINAL: littlecrankshaf

ORIGINAL: phlpsfrnk

So you agree that not all FPV flying should be considered a modeling activity?

Regards
Frank

Yes, I agree... the same as I agree all Rider trucks aren't used for moving...been trying to hammer that home around here forever...it's not the equipment, its the intent and use of whatever that matters... He could have used a slow-stik, scale P-51 or any number of other siz wizzys and my position would be exactly the same.

OK, let's see if I can get a sense of the limits you will agree to here. If I were to equip my 10 lb scale Lockheed U2 with FPV, how high above 400 ft or how far out of sight should I be allowed to routinely fly it as long as I'm not using it to spy on anyone?